65% Chance of Irony Front Heading to SA/Detroit

[ChumpDumper]

My point, if you read the original post carefully, was not about following individual teams, it was about watching the playoffs while living in NYC and how it's not easily accessible unless you have stuff like TNT/ESPN because DUH, no local channels to bail you out.

So you weren't saying anything relevant. I accept that.

LA and New York have national papers, not *local* cute ones like the S.A. Express. If you read the internets as you so claimed, following your Spurs wouldn't have been a problem while living in California.

It wasn't a problem.

Way to miss the point.

Again.

Quit while you are far, far behind.

[ponky]

So you weren't saying anything relevant. I accept that.It wasn't a problem.

Way to miss the point.

Again.

Quit while you are far, far behind.

Far behind what? An idiot who selectively takes one line from a post and runs with it rather than taking the time out to follow the thread? Yeah, I'm far far behind, ha. Guess Bill Simmons was right after all: “The funny part was all the angry e-mails from the San Antonio area -- is San Antonio a third world country or something and nobody told me? I haven't seen that many misspellings and crazed threats in the history of my column,” wrote Simmons. “If there was a way to send e-mails in capital letters and crayons, that would have been the typical response from a Spurs fan. Do they have school systems there or is it simply home schooling and that's it?” Next time you try to be sarcastic and post something witty, don't.

[ChumpDumper]

Wow, again with the irrelevant blather.

Next time you try to post something, don't.

[ponky]

Wow, again with the irrelevant blather.

Next time you try to post something, don't.

Are you that starved for attention? Look at all those threads where you've had the last post. Continue dreaming about the off season (yes, i read your long-winded wish list on that other thread) and while you're at it, work on your sarcasm so you'll be ready when we pwn your ass again next season. Goodnight.

[ChumpDumper]

Look at all those threads where you've had the last post

Hey, I've been away for awhile and I'm awake.

yes, i read your long-winded wish list on that other thread

Can't look away can you?

Feel free to scroll.

[fyatuk]

I won't watch the Finals. I'm not watching any of the playoffs. The early round officiating (of all the series) turned me off so much I have no interest in this years playoffs. If it wasn't a game 7, I wouldn't have watched the last game between the Mavs and Spurs.

I don't like spending an entire game yelling at refs.

[Jdspur20]

that would have been the typical response from a Spurs fan.

so spurs fans have there own responses now?

[ShoogarBear]

Why don't we just have a Stupid ing Mav Fans forum?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

ponky, just shut up

[I H8 Mavs Fans]

100% chance of Mavs fans still being assholes

[ponky]

hahahaha, nice to see everyone in a tiff about nothing, read the original thread and then respond...this didn't have anything to do with spurs/mavs in the beginning, i was just posting about ratings and the nba moving to cable...your little chumpdumper starting in with the "mavs fan" bull ...way to back up a loser, twice

[FromWayDowntown]

If the insinuation is that people would rather watch the Mavericks than the Spurs, I don't buy that. I don't see the Mavericks playing a style that is appreciably more watchable than the style the Spurs now play. It's not like this is the 2003 up-and-down and in the high 100's Mavericks; FWIW, during the regular season, the Mavericks played at a slower offensive pace each night than the Spurs did.

I don't see the Mavericks having any real ratings-getter on the roster -- no Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, Wade. And I'm not sure that the average sports viewer who doesn't pay much attention to regular season NBA will hear "Dirk Nowitzki" and think "superstar;" they should, but I'm not sure he carries that clout yet. And I don't see the Mavericks having tremendous international appeal (outside of perhaps Germany).

If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Miami, the increase in ratings will have everything to do with bringing back the bedwetters who can't watch the NBA unless Shaq is involved. That, or the DWade crew. If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Detroit, I'm not sure viewership will increase appreciably, other than the influx of homes in Dallas that suddenly tune in.

[pussyface]

100% percent chance of the Spurs not playing in the finals.

[leemajors]

the nba went to cable because they were able to offer more money. ponky must still have problems connecting the dots.

[DubMcDub]

If the insinuation is that people would rather watch the Mavericks than the Spurs, I don't buy that. I don't see the Mavericks playing a style that is appreciably more watchable than the style the Spurs now play. It's not like this is the 2003 up-and-down and in the high 100's Mavericks; FWIW, during the regular season, the Mavericks played at a slower offensive pace each night than the Spurs did.

I don't see the Mavericks having any real ratings-getter on the roster -- no Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, Wade. And I'm not sure that the average sports viewer who doesn't pay much attention to regular season NBA will hear "Dirk Nowitzki" and think "superstar;" they should, but I'm not sure he carries that clout yet. And I don't see the Mavericks having tremendous international appeal (outside of perhaps Germany).

If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Miami, the increase in ratings will have everything to do with bringing back the bedwetters who can't watch the NBA unless Shaq is involved. That, or the DWade crew. If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Detroit, I'm not sure viewership will increase appreciably, other than the influx of homes in Dallas that suddenly tune in.

There was an ESPN SportsNation poll the day of Game 7 and 82% of the country said they would rather see Dallas win than San Antonio.

Only 45% or so said they thought Dallas would actually win, but EIGHTY TWO percent said they wanted them to.

That's pretty telling. Keep going on and on about how the average person wouldn't rather watch the Mavericks though....

[FromWayDowntown]

There was an ESPN SportsNation poll the day of Game 7 and 82% of the country said they would rather see Dallas win than San Antonio.

Only 45% or so said they thought Dallas would actually win, but EIGHTY TWO percent said they wanted them to.

That's pretty telling. Keep going on and on about how the average person wouldn't rather watch the Mavericks though....

You assume that's because the average fan would rather watch the Mavericks -- the poll didn't ask that question. Explain to me how that result means that a substantially higher number of people would watch the Mavericks, should they make the Finals, than would have (or have) watched the Spurs.

Make a case for why the Mavericks (independent of the Miami Hype Machine) are going to draw viewers to the Finals. Seriously. I'd like to know what you think -- I'd like to know what I'm missing about the national television audience darlings in Dallas.

In the end, we'll see. I just haven't yet seen anyone explain to me how the Mavericks are substantially more compelling to a national television audience than the Spurs.

[DubMcDub]

You assume that's because the average fan would rather watch the Mavericks -- the poll didn't ask that question. Explain to me how that result means that a substantially higher number of people would watch the Mavericks, should they make the Finals, than would have (or have) watched the Spurs.

Make a case for why the Mavericks (independent of the Miami Hype Machine) are going to draw viewers to the Finals. Seriously. I'd like to know what you think -- I'd like to know what I'm missing about the national television audience darlings in Dallas.

In the end, we'll see. I just haven't yet seen anyone explain to me how the Mavericks are substantially more compelling to a national television audience than the Spurs.

I don't necessarily think it is the case that substantially more or less people would watch either way. But I do think the nation clearly would prefer to see the Mavericks. Their style of play is more entertaining to the average basketball fan (your typical fan always has and always will prefer scoring to defense), AND, perhaps even more importantly, the Spurs have won 3 recent les--people without a stake in either the Mavs or the Spurs would probably choose the Mavs simply because they'd rather see a "new" team get a shot at a le.

I think it's quite possible (as the poll proves) that many people DO have a definite preference, but I don't know if that preference would necessarily dictate whether they watch. For example, I REALLY wanted a Spurs-Heat final last year, but I still watched every game even though it was the Pistons.

[veronicamae]

LA and New York have national papers, not *local* cute ones like the S.A. Express. If you read the internets as you so claimed, following your Spurs wouldn't have been a problem while living in California. Way to look like a moron.

Last I checked, there is the New York Times as well as the Los Angeles Times - local papers, not national. Every city has a national paper, it's called the USA Today.

[ChumpDumper]

I have no problem admitting the lowest common denominator fan would prefer to see Dallas.

punky still doen't know what the he or anyone else is talking about. Expect another non sequitur ramble from him soon. Although he'll probably take some time figuring out what the previous sentence means.

[FromWayDowntown]

I don't necessarily think it is the case that substantially more or less people would watch either way. But I do think the nation clearly would prefer to see the Mavericks.

It could be. I'd be surprised, if only because the non-local NBA fan isn't about the compelling nature of teams; it's all about transcendant media superstars and the only such person involved in the Mavericks organization is Mark Cuban. I'm not sure that most sports fans in the United States know enough about Dirk Nowitzki to have decided whether to love him or hate him -- at least not yet. As much as you may wish to believe that the Mavericks team and players are compelling stories and will be embraced on a broad scale when placed on the ultimate stage, I can tell you that we went through the same things with our Spurs and have seen that the storyline doesn't sell unless Shaq or Kobe or someone like that is in the opposite uniform.

Their style of play is more entertaining to the average basketball fan (your typical fan always has and always will prefer scoring to defense),

But, see, that's my point. The Mavericks don't play a style that is tremendously different than the Spurs any more. The teams are far more similar in terms of style than they are dissimilar. I don't think the difference in the recent series was as much about styles of play as some would argue. If anything, the Mavericks had to adjust from their own style to jump out 3-1, and at that, were only marginally better than the Spurs were in playing that style. It's not as if the Mavs play a Suns-like style while the Spurs play like they did in the late 90's. If there's a perception that the styles are different, that perception strikes me as quite wrong.

AND, perhaps even more importantly, the Spurs have won 3 recent les--people without a stake in either the Mavs or the Spurs would probably choose the Mavs simply because they'd rather see a "new" team get a shot at a le.

I buy that as an explanation for the polling data that you cite.

I think it's quite possible (as the poll proves) that many people DO have a definite preference, but I don't know if that preference would necessarily dictate whether they watch. For example, I REALLY wanted a Spurs-Heat final last year, but I still watched every game even though it was the Pistons.

Other than the above rationale, I'm not sure that there is a preference between the Spurs and Mavs -- other than that the media has been pounding the "Spurs are boring" mantra into the heads of casual fans for years while the Mavericks are perceived by some in the media to be more like their 2001-03 teams than they really are any more.

I'll watch every game, too.

[mabber]

If the insinuation is that people would rather watch the Mavericks than the Spurs, I don't buy that. I don't see the Mavericks playing a style that is appreciably more watchable than the style the Spurs now play. It's not like this is the 2003 up-and-down and in the high 100's Mavericks; FWIW, during the regular season, the Mavericks played at a slower offensive pace each night than the Spurs did.

I don't see the Mavericks having any real ratings-getter on the roster -- no Kobe, Shaq, Lebron, Wade. And I'm not sure that the average sports viewer who doesn't pay much attention to regular season NBA will hear "Dirk Nowitzki" and think "superstar;" they should, but I'm not sure he carries that clout yet. And I don't see the Mavericks having tremendous international appeal (outside of perhaps Germany).

If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Miami, the increase in ratings will have everything to do with bringing back the bedwetters who can't watch the NBA unless Shaq is involved. That, or the DWade crew. If the Mavs reach the Finals and play Detroit, I'm not sure viewership will increase appreciably, other than the influx of homes in Dallas that suddenly tune in.

I agree with this post and I'm a Mav fan. To add to it, the NBA final's ratings won't increase significantly until LeBron makes it there. The average fan watches because of the player not the team. As mentioned above, Shaq would draw some in. Kobe could do that as well.

[leemajors]

I agree with this post and I'm a Mav fan. To add to it, the NBA final's ratings won't increase significantly until LeBron makes it there. The average fan watches because of the player not the team. As mentioned above, Shaq would draw some in. Kobe could do that as well.

true, true. NBA is a star driven league. the NFL is a better example of a team driven game.

[cherylsteele]

100% percent chance of the Spurs not playing in the finals.

Thank you Captain Obvious

[I H8 Mavs Fans]

100% percent chance of the Spurs not playing in the finals.

No sherlock, you want to tell us that the Earth orbits the Sun while you're at it, also I think this little stat can be infered by your original post

[DubMcDub]

It could be. I'd be surprised, if only because the non-local NBA fan isn't about the compelling nature of teams; it's all about transcendant media superstars and the only such person involved in the Mavericks organization is Mark Cuban. I'm not sure that most sports fans in the United States know enough about Dirk Nowitzki to have decided whether to love him or hate him -- at least not yet. As much as you may wish to believe that the Mavericks team and players are compelling stories and will be embraced on a broad scale when placed on the ultimate stage, I can tell you that we went through the same things with our Spurs and have seen that the storyline doesn't sell unless Shaq or Kobe or someone like that is in the opposite uniform.



But, see, that's my point. The Mavericks don't play a style that is tremendously different than the Spurs any more. The teams are far more similar in terms of style than they are dissimilar. I don't think the difference in the recent series was as much about styles of play as some would argue. If anything, the Mavericks had to adjust from their own style to jump out 3-1, and at that, were only marginally better than the Spurs were in playing that style. It's not as if the Mavs play a Suns-like style while the Spurs play like they did in the late 90's. If there's a perception that the styles are different, that perception strikes me as quite wrong.



I buy that as an explanation for the polling data that you cite.



Other than the above rationale, I'm not sure that there is a preference between the Spurs and Mavs -- other than that the media has been pounding the "Spurs are boring" mantra into the heads of casual fans for years while the Mavericks are perceived by some in the media to be more like their 2001-03 teams than they really are any more.

I'll watch every game, too.

I just wanted to say I appreciated your reasoned and well thought points here. Nice to see someone who doesn't immediately resort to attacks.

I agree with you, too. The Mavericks play a "Spurs-lite" brand of ball these days. But regardless of the reality, the perception is still apparent from time to time that the Mavericks are a "high-octane" team whereas the Spurs are slow and boring.

Now, I'm not saying this notion is accurate or justified. I'm just saying it's there.